CHARACTER IN ARCHITECTURE.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR:] have only just seen the criticisms of "D. S. M." on modern English architecture in the Spectator of May 13th; and it is refreshing to find some one who will say out what see many of us think. I often wish that Mr. Ruskin, before giving his lessons on conscientious detail in Art, had devoted a volume to impressing on his disciples that a building—to be really satisfactory—may dispense entirely with ornaments, but never with character. I write from Central Italy, where a homely and even ugly style will often impress one with the vigorous conception of its designer. "Flabbiness " instead, is the word best adapted to the modern English style. Have you ever noticed how few, if any, architects make a feature of their entrance ? This is very noticeable at the Imperial Institute, where the crown of the entrance arch is on the same level with the windows. In Tuscany, many old archi- tects have quite redeemed the bareness of a square stucco. palace by a splendid doorway, on which alone ornament has been lavished, and it is often united with the window above so as to form a grand centre. Were I to call in an architect to build a house, I should insist upon his giving me the first design without a particle of ornament to distract one from the simple conception of the building as a whole. Ornament in these days is the cloak which covers and tries 'to hide poverty of ideas.—I am, Sir, &o., Lucca, May 26th. RUSTICUS EXPECTINS.
Previous page
